Commentary on Daniel: Chapter 11

Daniel 11

God does not view history as we do. What we see as
important, God sometimes just skips over. He includes what
he views as important and omits the rest. We should strive
to see history as God sees it and not strive to force our
view of what is important on God.

The focus of this vision is the history of the Jews in
the latter days, where the latter days refers to the end of
the Jewish age which occurred in the first century.

The focus is not the end of the world and the focus is
not the many other nations that are mentioned. These other
nations are only important with regard to how they are
involved with the Jews.

Finally, as we will see, the prophecies in this chapter
are some of the most detailed found anywhere in the Bible.
Further, they were given to Daniel hundreds of years before
they came to pass. (The extreme level of detail is what has
caused the liberals to conclude that it must have been
written after the fact.)

Such extreme precision raises many philosophical
questions about the foreknowledge of God and the free will
of man. We will not consider these questions now, but
anyone who does should definitely take a long look at
Daniel 11. Very few sections of scripture give us a better
demonstration of God’s knowledge and control of the
future.

1 And as for me, in the first year of Darius the Mede,
I stood up to confirm and strengthen him.

This verse really belongs at the end of Chapter 10. The
angel, still speaking, tells Daniel that he stood up and
helped Michael in his struggle with Persia.

As we have already mentioned, Satan was actively seeking
to destroy the Jews so that God’s plan could not
proceed.

About 50 years after this vision, during the reign of
Xerxes, Haman received consent to kill all of the Jews. As
we recall, his plans were thwarted by Queen Esther.

Much later, Antiochus IV Epiphanes tried to exterminate
the Jewish culture and religion. We recall the outcome of
that attempt.

In each case, we can only speculate about the spiritual
battles that were occurring.

2 “And now I will show you the truth. Behold, three
more kings shall arise in Persia; and a fourth shall be
far richer than all of them; and when he has become
strong through his riches, he shall stir up all against
the kingdom of Greece.

The three kings that followed Cyrus were Cambyses
(Cyrus’ elder son), Gaumata (the impostor who passed
himself off as Cyrus’ younger son Smerdis), and Darius the
Persian (son of Hystaspes and cousin of Cyrus who killed
the impostor and took the throne).

The fourth king after Cyrus was Xerxes (Darius’ son) who
reigned from 485 to 464. This king is called Ahasuerus in
the book of Esther. Esther 1:4 talks about the “riches of
his glorious kingdom.”

Xerxes invaded Greece with a huge army and was very
successful until his navy was defeated by a united Greek
fleet at the Battle of Salamis in 480. He retreated to Asia
and his forces that remained in Greece were completely
defeated the next year at the Battle of Plataea.

3 Then a mighty king shall arise, who shall rule with
great dominion and do according to his will.

In moving from verse 2 to verse 3, we skip over 6
Persian kings and 134 years. Note that this skip occurred
without any warning. We will need to be very alert so that
we will notice such jumps should they occur again. Notice
also that the country of interest has changed from Persia
to Greece.

The mighty king is Alexander the Great who defeated the
Persians in 331. He died in 323 at the age of 33. The
Hebrew for “shall arise” is literally “shall stand up,”
which emphasizes how brief his reign was.

4 And when he has arisen, his kingdom shall be broken
and divided toward the four winds of heaven, but not to
his posterity, nor according to the dominion with which
he ruled; for his kingdom shall be plucked up and go to
others besides these.

Alexander’s kingdom did not go to his posterity, which
included his Persian princess wife Roxana and their son,
Alexander IV (who was murdered in 310). Alexander IV’s
illegitimate brother had already been killed in 317. Thus,
there were no blood descendants of Alexander, as the book
of Daniel predicted.

Instead, it was divided into four pieces among
Lysimachus, Antipater (and his son Cassander), Seleucus I
Nicator, and Ptolemy I Soter.

5 “Then the king of the south shall be strong, but one
of his princes shall be stronger than he and his dominion
shall be a great dominion.

The king of the South is Ptolemy I Soter whose ambitions
extended far beyond Egypt to include Palestine and the rest
of Asia. For most of their history, however, the domain of
the Ptolemies was restricted to Egypt and Cyprus.

The prince who would be stronger than the king was
Seleucus Nicator of the Seleucid Empire, who defected to
Ptolemy after the Battle of Antigonus. He later returned to
Babylon and became king under Ptolemy’s sponsorship. His
empire and authority stretched from India to Phoenicia, and
thus was much greater than that of Ptolemy.

6 After some years they shall make an alliance, and
the daughter of the king of the south shall come to the
king of the north to make peace; but she shall not retain
the strength of her arm, and he and his offspring shall
not endure; but she shall be given up, and her
attendants, her child, and he who got possession of
her.

After the death of Ptolemy I in 285, his son Ptolemy II
(Philadelphus) continued the contest with the Seleucids
until 252 when a peace treaty was made with Antiochus II
Theos. Under this treaty, Antiochus II was to marry
Berenice, the daughter of Ptolemy II.

One slight problem with the plan was that Antiochus II
was already married to a very influential woman named
Laodice. She was divorced and banished. She arranged the
assassination of the king, Berenice, and their infant son.
Afterward, she took control as queen regent for her young
son, Seleucus II (Callinicus).

7 “In those times a branch from her roots shall arise
in his place; he shall come against the army and enter
the fortress of the king of the north, and he shall deal
with them and shall prevail. 8 He shall also carry off to
Egypt their gods with their molten images and with their
precious vessels of silver and of gold; and for some
years he shall refrain from attacking the king of the
north.

Ptolemy II died soon after his daughter Berenice was
murdered. His son, Ptolemy III (Euergetes) came to power
and marched off to avenge his sister’s death. He is the
“branch from her [Berenice’s] roots” in verse 7.

The king of the north is Seleucus II Callinicus, the son
of Laodice. Ptolemy captured the capital city of Antioch
and returned to Egypt laden with spoil. This spoil included
long-lost idols that had been taken by Cambyses in 524 BC.
Their return made Ptolemy III very popular with the native
Egyptian populace, who named him Euergetes which means
benefactor.

Ptolemy III made a peace treaty with Seleucus II in 240
BC.

9 Then the latter shall come into the realm of the
king of the south but shall return into his own land.

The “latter” is Seleucus II and the “king of the south”
is Ptolemy III. While their is no record that Seleucus II
ever invaded Egypt, he did invade the territory of the
Ptolemies in the 230s when he regained control of northern
Syria and Phoenicia.

10 “His sons shall wage war and assemble a multitude
of great forces, which shall come on and overflow and
pass through, and again shall carry the war as far as his
fortress. 11 Then the king of the south, moved with
anger, shall come out and fight with the king of the
north; and he shall raise a great multitude, but it shall
be given into his hand. 12 And when the multitude is
taken, his heart shall be exalted, and he shall cast down
tens of thousands, but he shall not prevail.

Seleucus II Callinicus died in 226 and was succeeded by
his son Seleucus III Soter, who reigned for only three
years and was succeeded by his brother Antiochus III (the
Great).

The king of the south in verse 11 is Ptolemy IV
Philopater and the king of the north is Antiochus III.
Ptolemy IV defeated the much larger army of Antiochus III
at the Battle of Raphia in 217.

Ptolemy IV got back all of the territory of Phoenicia
and Palestine, but his success did not last very long.
After he died, his four year old son Ptolemy V (Epiphanes)
came to power and Antiochus saw his chance to invade
Egypt.

The Rosetta Stone, which finally allowed modern scholars
to understand Egyptian hieroglyphics, was found in 1799
built into an old wall that was being demolished by the
French near a village they called Rosetta. Located now in
the British Museum, it contains a decree given by Ptolemy V
written in three languages: Greek, Egyptian Demotic, and
Egyptian hieroglyphics.

13 For the king of the north shall again raise a
multitude, greater than the former; and after some years
he shall come on with a great army and abundant
supplies.

In 202, Antiochus III (the king of the north) invaded
Phoenicia and Palestine and marched all the way to Gaza,
which fell in 201.

14 “In those times many shall rise against the king of
the south; and the men of violence among your own people
shall lift themselves up in order to fulfil the vision;
but they shall fail.

The king of the south here is Ptolemy V. The “men of
violence among your own people” are the pro-Seleucid Jews
who rebelled against the Ptolemies. The vision they were
fulfilling by doing this was the very vision that Daniel
was now receiving!

But they failed. The Egyptians, led by General Scopas,
punished the Jewish rebels severely until his defeat at the
Battle of Panium in 200 BC. He then retreated to Sidon off
the Phoenician coast.

15 Then the king of the north shall come and throw up
siegeworks, and take a well-fortified city. And the
forces of the south shall not stand, or even his picked
troops, for there shall be no strength to stand. 16 But
he who comes against him shall do according to his own
will, and none shall stand before him; and he shall stand
in the glorious land, and all of it shall be in his
power.

The king of the north (Antiochus III) moved against
Sidon, and Scopas finally surrendered. At this time,
Palestine (the glorious land) became a permanent part of
the Antioch government.

Antiochus did not destroy Jerusalem, but only extracted
reprisals from the pro-Egyptian leaders that he captured.
When he entered Jerusalem in 198 he was welcomed as a
deliverer and benefactor.

17 He shall set his face to come with the strength of
his whole kingdom, and he shall bring terms of peace and
perform them. He shall give him the daughter of women to
destroy the kingdom; but it shall not stand or be to his
advantage.

Antiochus’ plan at this point in the story was to place
the 10 year old king Ptolemy V under the influence of his
daughter Cleopatra I. [The Cleopatra from the movie was
Cleopatra VII. We will meet her in verse 40.] He knew that
their son would be legal heir to both thrones, and would
give him a good excuse to interfere in Egypt. The phrase
“destroy the kingdom” in verse 17 is better translated
“corrupt the kingdom.”

When the marriage finally did take place a few years
later, Cleopatra became completely sympathetic to Ptolemy V
and his kingdom, which greatly disappointed her father.
Thus, their son, Ptolemy VI, gave no advantage to Antiochus
III.

When Ptolemy V died, Cleopatra I became queen of Egypt.
Her death years later put an end to any possibility of
Seleucid influence in Egyptian affairs.

18 Afterward he shall turn his face to the coastlands,
and shall take many of them; but a commander shall put an
end to his insolence; indeed he shall turn his insolence
back upon him.

Soon after his victory over Scopas at Sidon, Antiochus
III moved against a new front, Pergamum and the Aegean
coastline island of Rhodes. The Rhodians appealed to Rome
for help.

Meanwhile, Hannibal (who had been exiled by the Romans)
joined forces with Antiochus III as a military advisor. The
Romans were not happy that he had given asylum to their
enemy.

The Roman commander Lucius Cornelius Scipio defeated
Antiochus III in 190 at Magnesium. (This same general had
defeated Hannibal in 202.)

Antiochus was humiliated by the Romans. He lost most of
his land and his army. His son Antiochus IV Epiphanes was
taken back to Rome as a hostage.

19 Then he shall turn his face back toward the
fortresses of his own land; but he shall stumble and
fall, and shall not be found.

Antiochus III died the next year while pillaging a
temple of Bel in Elymais in an attempt to raise money to
pay the Romans. The local inhabitants stormed his forces
and managed to kill him and defend their temple.

20 “Then shall arise in his place one who shall send
an exactor of tribute through the glory of the kingdom;
but within a few days he shall be broken, neither in
anger nor in battle.

Antiochus III was succeeded by his oldest son, Seleucus
IV (Philopator). The exactor of tribute that he sent out
was Heliodorus.

Heliodorus was sent to rob the temple at Jerusalem,
which a Jewish spy had said contained enough treasure to
meet all of the Roman demands. Heliodorus decided not to
rob the temple, but instead went back and eventually
poisoned the king, who thus did not die due to battle or
mob action as his father had.

21 In his place shall arise a contemptible person to
whom royal majesty has not been given; he shall come in
without warning and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.

Verses 21–35 are devoted to the activities of Antiochus
IV Epiphanes, who we first met in Chapter 8. As we recall,
he did his best to completely wipe out the Jewish religion
and culture by persecuting the Jews and introducing Greek
culture.

He is the “contemptible person” in verse 21 to whom
“royal majesty has not been given.” In fact, Demetrius I
Soter, the son of Seleucus IV, was next in line for the
crown. He, however, was being held hostage in Rome, so the
crown went to his uncle, Antiochus IV Epiphanes instead.
(Antiochus was later able to set aside Demetrius’ claims to
the throne, but Demetrius later led a Roman army against
Antiochus’ son, Antiochus V Eupator.)

“Epiphanes” mean illustrious, very evident, or manifest.
On coins, he linked the name with “theos,” thus taking the
title “God Manifest.” Many of his enemies referred to him
instead as “Epinanes” which means “madman.”

22 Armies shall be utterly swept away before him and
broken, and the prince of the covenant also. 23 And from
the time that an alliance is made with him he shall act
deceitfully; and he shall become strong with a small
people. 24 Without warning he shall come into the richest
parts of the province; and he shall do what neither his
fathers nor his fathers’ fathers have done, scattering
among them plunder, spoil, and goods. He shall devise
plans against strongholds, but only for a time.

Verses 22–24 bring us back to the continuing struggle
between the Seleucids and the Ptolemies. It was Epiphanes’
policy to first offer friendship and then wait for an
opportunity to launch a surprise attack.

Ptolemy VI launched an invasion against Antiochus, which
at first was successful but eventually led to his capture.
The Egyptians gave up on him and placed his brother Ptolemy
Physcon on the throne. Antiochus placed Ptolemy back on the
throne by force, this time as his ally backed up by a
treaty of friendship and alliance.

Ptolemy Physcon is also known as Ptolemy VIII or
Euergetes II. His nickname Physcon means ‘fat paunch.’ I am
not sure which is worse: being deposed from the throne of
Egypt by your brother or going through history with the
nickname ‘fat paunch.’ Both of these things happened to
Ptolemy VIII.

Eventually, Ptolemy VI made an alliance with his
banished brother Physcon to get rid of Antiochus. Antiochus
then marched against Egypt, but this time Rome intervened
and told him to leave Egypt or face war with Rome. Popilius
drew a circle around him in the sand and told him to make
up his mind before he left it. He left in humiliation.

The “prince of the covenant” in verse 22 is probably
Onias III, the high priest. Antiochus had him replaced by
his brother, Joshua (who went by his Greek name Jason), in
exchange for a large bribe. Jason was later replaced by
Menelaus who offered a larger bribe. Menelaus had Onias
III, the legitimate high priest, killed.

The “small people” in verse 23 refer to the small
invasion force Antiochus used in his initial invasion of
Egypt. The “richest parts of the province” refers not only
to Egypt but also to the eastern provinces he invaded.

25 And he shall stir up his power and his courage
against the king of the south with a great army; and the
king of the south shall wage war with an exceedingly
great and mighty army; but he shall not stand, for plots
shall be devised against him. 26 Even those who eat his
rich food shall be his undoing; his army shall be swept
away, and many shall fall down slain.

Verse 25 describes the attack by Antiochus against
Ptolemy Physcon (the king of the south in verse 25) in the
attempt to put Ptolemy VI back on the throne. Those
Egyptians still loyal to Ptolemy VI plotted against
Physcon.

27 And as for the two kings, their minds shall be bent
on mischief; they shall speak lies at the same table, but
to no avail; for the end is yet to be at the time
appointed.

The two kings, after the defeat of Ptolemy Physcon, were
Antiochus IV and Ptolemy VI. As this verse suggests, they
sat down and made a treaty after the defeat of Physcon, but
already they were plotting against each other.

28 And he shall return to his land with great
substance, but his heart shall be set against the holy
covenant. And he shall work his will, and return to his
own land.

Antiochus returned to his capital city of Antioch with a
great deal of plundered wealth from Egypt. It is at this
point that he set his mind against the “holy covenant”;
that is, he began to persecute the Jews.

The deposed illegitimate high priest Jason had heard a
rumor that Antiochus had died in Egypt. He thus took the
city of Jerusalem and locked up the other illegitimate high
priest Menelaus. Antiochus decided to get rid of the Jewish
religion altogether. He took the city back, released
Menelaus, killed 80,000 people, and robbed and desecrated
the temple. (This occurred in 168 BC.)

29 “At the time appointed he shall return and come
into the south; but it shall not be this time as it was
before. 30 For ships of Kittim shall come against him,
and he shall be afraid and withdraw, and shall turn back
and be enraged and take action against the holy covenant.
He shall turn back and give heed to those who forsake the
holy covenant.

These verses predict Antiochus’ humiliation by Rome and
his subsequent return to desecrate the temple in Jerusalem.
Those “who forsake the holy covenant” in verse 30 are the
allies of Menelaus who did not protest as Antiochus
pillaged the temple.

The ships of Kittim are Roman ships. Kittim refers to
Cyprus, which was under Roman dominion.

31 Forces from him shall appear and profane the temple
and fortress, and shall take away the continual burnt
offering. And they shall set up the abomination that
makes desolate.

This verse gives more details about the desecration of
the temple that occurred in December 168 BC.

The “abomination that makes desolate” may refer to a
statue of Jupiter that was set up in the inner sanctuary.
In fact, the temple was renamed the temple of Zeus
Olympius. It may also refer to the desecration of the altar
that occurred when a pig was sacrificed and the temple was
sprinkled with pig broth.

In Matthew 24:15, Jesus speaks of the abomination of
desolation that Daniel the prophet spoke of. However, Jesus
made it very clear that the event he was referring to had
not yet occurred, but would occur soon. (See Matthew
24:34.) Thus, Matthew 24:15 cannot be referring to Daniel
11:31 since the event predicted by Daniel 11:31 came to
pass before the birth of Christ. What was Jesus referring
to then? Stay tuned…

32 He shall seduce with flattery those who violate the
covenant; but the people who know their God shall stand
firm and take action.

Antiochus was a master at winning over people with
flattery and empty promises. He convinced many of the
influential Jews to adopt his pro-Hellenic policies. These
are the ones who “violate the covenant”; that is, they
violated their covenant with God by compromising with the
world.

One commentator notes:

In some ways this defection of the would-be
“progressives” among the Jews themselves was an even more
serious threat to the survival of Israel as a nation than
the tyrannical measures of Antiochus. For it was the same
kind of large-scale betrayal of their covenant
obligations toward the Lord that had made inevitable the
former destruction of Jerusalem and the Babylonian
captivity in the days of Jeremiah.

Those who “stand firm and take action” are the Maccabees
who stood up to Antiochus and started the revolt that
eventually led to the first independent Jewish nation since
before the Babylonian captivity.

Again, one commentator notes:

Their uncompromising commitment to faithful adherence
to the Mosaic covenant and law resulted in the spiritual
survival of the nation till the first coming of the Lord
Jesus.

33 And those among the people who are wise shall make
many understand, though they shall fall by sword and
flame, by captivity and plunder, for some days.

The Maccabean leaders went throughout the countryside
and preached a message of repentance and a return to the
law of Moses. These are the “wise” that “make many
understand.”

The patriots, however, suffered great hardship. Many
lost their lives as Antiochus pursued them and burned their
fields and cities.

34 When they fall, they shall receive a little help.
And many shall join themselves to them with flattery;

Many of the initial leaders, including Mattathias
himself, died early during the struggle. Those who were
left received a “little help” from early supporters of
their cause.

When it began to look like they were going to win, many
more joined their cause. Many of these latter converts were
insincere and only switched over to save their own
necks.

35 and some of those who are wise shall fall, to
refine and to cleanse them and to make them white, until
the time of the end, for it is yet for the time
appointed.

Many of the Jewish patriots faced death early in the
struggle rather than retreat to save their lives. This
verse stresses the spiritual meaning of the struggle. Those
who fell lost their lives but saved their souls. Then as
today, those who seek to save their life will lose it.

The context suggests that the time of the end in this
verse is the end of the Jewish struggle with the Seleucids,
which came in 142 when Judea became politically independent
25 years after the start of the rebellion. The Seleucids
lasted a little longer but their power had been permanently
broken. Again, we discover here that their end was a part
of God’s plan for the Jews.

36 “And the king shall do according to his will; he
shall exalt himself and magnify himself above every god,
and shall speak astonishing things against the God of
gods. He shall prosper till the indignation is
accomplished; for what is determined shall be done.

Who is the king mentioned in verse 36? Verses 28–35 have
been discussing the “king of the north” so it would seem
that verse 36 is also discussing the “king of the north.”
But who is this king of the north? (We have seen four
different kings of the north so far.)

(1) Some say that the king of the north is Antiochus IV
Epiphanes, who we have been reading about since verse 21.
Although a cursory reading seems to make this choice the
most likely, a more in-depth study leaves no doubt that
verse 36 is no longer talking about Antiochus IV.

Antiochus IV never fought a war against Egypt after 168
BC. Thus, verses 40–43 cannot apply to him.

Antiochus IV never conquered Libya and Ethiopia as verse
43 suggests the king in verse 36 did.

Antiochus IV never had all the riches mentioned in verse
43. In fact, he robbed temples in his spare time to pay the
Roman taxes.

(2) The premillennialists says that the king in verse 36
is the antichrist, who will show up just before Christ
shows up to reign on earth for 1000 years.

As we have said, this view cannot possibly be correct
since the vision is explicitly said to deal with the
history of the Jews in the latter days, where we know from
Acts 2 that the latter days occurred in the first
century.

As we will see, this vision ends in AD 70 with the
destruction of Jerusalem and the temple by the Romans.
Contextually there is no valid reason to insert a gap of at
least several thousand years into this vision as the
premillennialists try to do.

In short, this view has all of the problems associated
with premillennialism, which as we have seen are
legion.

(3) Who then is this king? Well, let’s look at the
problem in reverse. We have said that this vision deals
with Jewish history up to AD 70. Further, we have seen the
Persians and the Greeks so far. Who haven’t we seen?
Rome!

How could we possibly have a history of the Jews in the
latter days that did not mention Rome? Jerusalem was
destroyed by the Romans in AD 70. Rome fits in perfectly
with the declared scope of this vision.

Also, as we will see, the description in verses 36–45
fits very well with what we know about Rome and the Roman
rulers. (This will be made clear as we continue through the
text.)

Which Roman king does verse 36 refer to? My own view is
that the description in verses 36–40 does not refer to any
single Roman ruler, but instead is a composite description
of many Roman rulers, and in fact is a description of Rome
itself.

I think verse 36 summarizes the Roman mindset from its
emergence as a world power until its fall. This king does
whatever he wants, he magnifies himself above every god,
and sets himself against the true God. As we know, this
fits very well with what we might call the “typical” Roman
emperor.

Consider the following passage from 2 Thessalonians in
which I think Paul is discussing the Roman emperor
Domitian:

2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 Let no one deceive you in any
way; for that day will not come, unless the rebellion
comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the
son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself
against every so-called god or object of worship, so that
he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming
himself to be God.

And what is the indignation? I think it is the final
outpouring of God’s wrath on Rome. Although this occurred
long after AD 70, it is mentioned in this vision as a side
comment. In fact, each time Rome is referred to, we are
given a side comment to the effect that “they are getting
it too one of these days!”

I think we see the same thing in Luke 21:24. There,
Jesus is talking about the destruction of Jerusalem at the
hands of Rome, and he makes the following comment:

Luke 21:24 they will fall by the edge of the sword,
and be led captive among all nations; and Jerusalem will
be trodden down by the Gentiles, until the times of the
Gentiles are fulfilled.

In Luke, Jesus says “Jerusalem will be trodden down by
the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are
fulfilled.” Here in Daniel 11:36, the angel says “he shall
prosper till the indignation is accomplished.” I think that
both of these verses are saying that “Yes, Jerusalem will
be destroyed by the Romans, but the Romans are going to be
destroyed as well.”

This is just a side comment, however. The fall of Rome
is not part of the vision. Indeed, the vision ends at a
time when Rome is still very much in power.

One objection to the identification of this king in
verse 36 with Rome is that it causes a very abrupt change
from verse 35. But we saw another abrupt change back in
verse 3 when we switched from Persia to Greece. Back in
Chapter 5, the narrative jumped from the reign of
Nebuchadnezzar to the very end of the Babylonian empire.
Abrupt changes are not uncommon at all in Daniel. Indeed,
they seem to be the rule rather than the exception.

37 He shall give no heed to the gods of his fathers,
or to the one beloved by women; he shall not give heed to
any other god, for he shall magnify himself above
all.

Here we see even further the arrogance of Rome and of
the Roman rulers. As the Roman emperors began to deify
themselves, all other ‘gods’ were pushed aside. The Roman
rulers magnified themselves above all else.

The phrase “one beloved by women” is difficult to
interpret. It may simply be the counterpart to the gods of
their fathers; that is, they would pay no heed to the gods
of their fathers or of their mothers. Or, perhaps there is
a particular god the angel has in mind; one that was
worshipped primarily by women.

A literal translation of the passage points to another
possibility. Literally, the phrase is “the love of women”;
that is, these rulers would pay no heed to the love of
women. As we know, homosexuality was rampant in Rome, and
it is possible that this verse is referring to the moral
collapse of Rome, which we know from secular historians
contributed to Rome’s fall.

38 He shall honor the god of fortresses instead of
these; a god whom his fathers did not know he shall honor
with gold and silver, with precious stones and costly
gifts.

Rome only had one real god throughout its history. Rome
worshipped power. Rome worshipped war. Rome’s god was the
“god of fortresses.”

Rome did not care what type of religion you practiced
just so long as you recognized their ultimate authority and
you paid your taxes. Rome was not religiously zealous in
the sense that they sought to convert those they conquered
for religious reasons. Everything Rome did was for
pragmatic reasons. They worshipped at the altar of
perpetual power, and all of their resources were devoted to
that god.

39 He shall deal with the strongest fortresses by the
help of a foreign god; those who acknowledge him he shall
magnify with honor. He shall make them rulers over many
and shall divide the land for a price.

Rome used other nations and their “foreign gods” to
accomplish its goals. In fact, Rome used anything and
everything necessary to accomplish its goals.

This verse suggests that Rome would magnify with honor
those who helped it and would divide the land for a price.
Did Rome do this? Yes. Rome set up a system of client
kingdoms around its border. Consider the following
description found in the History of Rome by Michael
Grant:

The client kings were tied to the service of Rome in
order to defend its frontiers and serve as listening
posts to the outside world. In return, they were
supported by the Romans against internal subversive
movements and allowed a free hand inside their own
countries. Thus Rome was spared the trouble and expense
of administering these territories; and the formula
worked well.

In Chapter 2, Rome was pictured as being composed of
iron mixed with clay. That is Rome was both strong and
weak. The weakness came from these client kingdoms, which
history tells us contributed to their downfall. This is
also referred to in Revelation 17:12–17.

40 “At the time of the end the king of the south shall
attack him; but the king of the north shall rush upon him
like a whirlwind, with chariots and horsemen, and with
many ships; and he shall come into countries and shall
overflow and pass through.

The time of the end, as it did earlier, points to the
time appointed by God for the events in the vision to have
all come to pass. All it means here is that we are nearing
the end of the vision.

The “king of the south” here is the Ptolemies of Egypt
under Cleopatra VII aided by Marc Antony. Their push
against Rome (the king of the north) led to Octavian’s
declaration of war against Egypt.

Rome is pictured as rushing in like a whirlwind with
ships and chariots. This began at the Battle of Actium in
31 BC, which ended the Ptolemy kingdom, which itself was
the last vestige of the Grecian kingdom. Egypt itself fell
to Octavian in 30 BC. Cleopatra and Marc Antony committed
suicide at Alexandria when the country fell to the
Romans.

Verse 40 very clearly indicates that the kingdom of the
north under consideration here is Rome. Who else was
attacked by Egypt during this time period? Who else so
thoroughly conquered Egypt during this time period?

41 He shall come into the glorious land. And tens of
thousands shall fall, but these shall be delivered out of
his hand: Edom and Moab and the main part of the
Ammonites.

The glorious land is Palestine, and of course as we
know, Rome took control of the holy land in 63 BC when
Pompey marched into Jerusalem.

Herod’s patron was Marc Antony. When Antony was
defeated, Herod as you might suspect switched sides.
Octavian realized the importance of Herod as a client king
and thus confirmed his royal status.

The ‘tens of thousands’ who fell are those who were on
the losing end of Rome’s continued expansion. As this verse
points out, however, Rome had its share of failures.

Aelius Gallus’ expedition into Arabia for Augustus, for
example, was not successful. Instead, he was betrayed by
Obodas, chief minister of the king of the Nabathean Arabs,
who forced Gallus to travel along a dangerous sea route by
falsely telling him that there was no safe land route. This
failed Arabian campaign may be what the angel has in mind
here in verse 41.

42 He shall stretch out his hand against the
countries, and the land of Egypt shall not escape. 43 He
shall become ruler of the treasures of gold and of
silver, and all the precious things of Egypt; and the
Libyans and the Ethiopians shall follow in his train.

After the defeat of Cleopatra, Octavian confiscated the
royal treasures of Egypt, just as verse 43 suggests.
Michael Grant says that Octavian’s “seizure of the
Cleopatra’s treasure made him wealthier than the Roman
state itself.”

As for the Libyans and the Ethiopians, they were also
part of the triumphal procession into the city of the Rome.
(Antony and Cleopatra killed themselves to avoid appearing
in just such a procession.)

Libya and Ethiopia, like Egypt, were conquered by Rome.
Ethiopia fell in 22 BC. Libya had long been under Roman
domination, but was claimed by Cleopatra when she marched
against Rome. Rome, of course, retained control.

44 But tidings from the east and the north shall alarm
him, and he shall go forth with great fury to exterminate
and utterly destroy many.

Again, we are reminded that all was not well with Rome.
Rome’s biggest threats came from the east and the north,
just as this verse suggests.

The Germanic hordes and the Gauls were north of Rome and
the Parthians were east of Rome.

Parthia was an Iranian feudal empire beyond the
Euphrates that had broken away from the Seleucids in the
third century BC. In the first century BC, they were only
the substantial foreign power confronting Rome anywhere in
the world.

Later in Rome’s history, the threat shifted to the
north. In fact, the city of Rome itself was sacked in AD
410 by Alaric, a (Germanic) Visigoth from the north. That
event marked the first time in 800 years that the city had
been taken by a foreign invader.

45 And he shall pitch his palatial tents between the
sea and the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to
his end, with none to help him.

This verse shows that Rome would be firmly in control of
Palestine, as in fact it was. The “sea” in Hebrew is plural
and refers most probably to the Dead Sea and the
Mediterranean.

Again, we are given a side comment to the effect that
Rome is not going to be around forever. The fall of Rome is
not a part of this vision because it takes place far
outside the clearly stated time frame and it has nothing at
all to do with the Jews. Even so, the angel makes it clear
to Daniel that Rome would not be around forever. They also
would come to an end as a part of God’s plan.

Notice the time frame of this verse. Rome is in control
of Palestine and Egypt has been defeated. What happens
next? Jesus is born! The very next verse begins with the
phrase “at that time.” Which time? During the time of Roman
rule. This time frame will be crucial to understanding
Chapter 12. (It will also help us avoid a very common
pitfall in Chapter 12.)

God's Plan of Salvation

You must hear the gospel and then understand and recognize that you are lost without Jesus Christ no matter who you are and no matter what your background is. The Bible tells us that “all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” (Romans 3:23) Before you can be saved, you must understand that you are lost and that the only way to be saved is by obedience to the gospel of Jesus Christ. (2 Thessalonians 1:8) Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” (John 14:6) “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12)

You must believe and have faith in God because “without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.” (Hebrews 11:6) But neither belief alone nor faith alone is sufficient to save. (James 2:19; James 2:24; Matthew 7:21)

You must repent of your sins. (Acts 3:19) But repentance alone is not enough. The so-called “Sinner’s Prayer” that you hear so much about today from denominational preachers does not appear anywhere in the Bible. Indeed, nowhere in the Bible was anyone ever told to pray the “Sinner’s Prayer” to be saved. By contrast, there are numerous examples showing that prayer alone does not save. Saul, for example, prayed following his meeting with Jesus on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:11), but Saul was still in his sins when Ananias met him three days later (Acts 22:16). Cornelius prayed to God always, and yet there was something else he needed to do to be saved (Acts 10:2, 6, 33, 48). If prayer alone did not save Saul or Cornelius, prayer alone will not save you. You must obey the gospel.
(2 Thess. 1:8)

You must confess that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. (Romans 10:9-10) Note that you do NOT need to make Jesus “Lord of your life.” Why? Because Jesus is already Lord of your life whether or not you have obeyed his gospel. Indeed, we obey him, not to make him Lord, but because he already is Lord. (Acts 2:36) Also, no one in the Bible was ever told to just “accept Jesus as your personal savior.” We must confess that Jesus is the Son of God, but, as with faith and repentance, confession alone does not save. (Matthew 7:21)

Having believed, repented, and confessed that Jesus is the Son of God, you must be baptized for the remission of your sins. (Acts 2:38) It is at this point (and not before) that your sins are forgiven. (Acts 22:16) It is impossible to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ without teaching the absolute necessity of baptism for salvation. (Acts 8:35-36; Romans 6:3-4; 1 Peter 3:21) Anyone who responds to the question in Acts 2:37 with an answer that contradicts Acts 2:38 is NOT proclaiming the gospel of Jesus Christ!

Once you are saved, God adds you to his church and writes your name in the Book of Life. (Acts 2:47; Philippians 4:3) To continue in God’s grace, you must continue to serve God faithfully until death. Unless they remain faithful, those who are in God’s grace will fall from grace, and those whose names are in the Book of Life will have their names blotted out of that book. (Revelation 2:10; Revelation 3:5; Galatians 5:4)

What is the church of Christ?

In Matthew 16:18, Jesus promised to build a church.
In Acts 2:47, Luke tells us that people were being
added to that church. Thus, we can conclude that Jesus
built His church sometime between His promise in
Matthew 16 and Luke’s statement in Acts 2. Indeed, a
closer study of the events in Acts 2 reveals that the
Lord’s church was established on that first day of
Pentecost following the Lord’s resurrection when Peter
preached the first gospel sermon. That church is the church of Christ.

A common misconception about the church of Christ is
that “The Church of Christ” is its name. It is not. The
“church of Christ” is its description. The church of
Christ is the church that belongs to Christ, that was
established by Christ, that was built by Christ, and
that was bought by Christ. It is not our church; it is
His church, the Lord’s church. We are not voted into
the church by men, and we do not join a church the way
some might join a country club. Instead, God adds us to
His church when we obey His gospel.

Are those in the church of Christ the only people
who are going to be saved? Of course they are! God
adds people to His church when they are saved. If you
are not in the Lord’s church, then you are not saved.
If you are saved, then you are in the Lord’s church. To
be saved outside of the church of Christ is to be saved
outside of the body of Christ – and that can never
happen. Jesus is not just a way to the Father; he is
the way to the Father. As Jesus said in John 14:6, “ I
am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto
the Father, but by me.”

Thus, the real question is not what is the church of
Christ, but is rather how do you become a part of the
church of Christ? That question was asked in the first
century as it is asked today, and the answer remains
the same. We are saved and added to the Lord’s church
when we obey the gospel of Jesus Christ. Like the
Apostle Paul, we are saved when our sins are washed
away at our baptism.

There is one church of Christ. If you are a member
of something else or something more or something less,
then you are not serving God according to His plan or
according to His will. He wants you to be a Christian
and only a Christian, wearing only the name of His Son,
Jesus Christ, who is the head and the savior of the
church, His body.

What Must I Do?

What must I do? That same question was asked in Acts 2:37 at the end of the very first gospel sermon ever preached. Before we look at Peter’s answer in verse 38, let’s look at some answers Peter did NOT give.

What must I do? John Calvin answers, “Nothing!” According to Calvin, there is nothing we must do and nothing we can do. Each of us has already been personally predestined to Heaven or Hell without regard to anything we do on Earth, and so, logically, according to Calvin, the only answer to the question in Acts 2:37 is “Nothing.” But that is NOT how Peter answered that question.

What must I do? Many preachers today answer, “You must make Jesus the Lord of your life.” But that answer makes absolutely no sense then or now! Peter had just said in Acts 2:36 that “God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.” Jesus was already Lord of their lives! Jesus is Lord of lords and King of kings, which means he is your Lord and your King whether or not you obey him or believe him. We obey Jesus because he is Lord and King – not to make him Lord and King.

What must I do? Many preachers today answer, “You must pray the sinner’s prayer and invite the Lord Jesus into you heart.” But no one in the Bible was ever told to do that. In fact, Paul prayed after he saw Jesus on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:11), and yet Paul was still in his sins when Ananias met him three days later (Acts 22:16). Cornelius prayed to God always (Acts 10:2), and yet there remained something he still had to do after calling for Peter (Acts 10:6). If praying the sinner’s prayer was all that Paul and Cornelius needed to do, then why were Ananias and Peter needed?

What must I do? Listen as Peter answers that question: “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” (Acts 2:38) That answer has not changed one bit in the intervening 2000 years. If your preacher is telling you something different, then you need a new preacher! “And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” (Acts 22:16)

We also have 24 lessons on First Corinthians. In this epistle, Paul deals with many current issues facing the church both then and now: immorality, divorce and remarriage, the role of women, spiritual gifts, the importance of love, and the resurrection of the body.

We have 25 lessons on Second Corinthians. In this epistle, Paul continues to deal with problems facing the church in Corinth, which now include an influx of false apostles who are belittling Paul and demeaning his apostolic authority.

We have 13 lessons on James and Jude, the two letters written by the earthly (half)-brothers of Christ. They have much to tell us about the Christian life and how we are to contend for the faith in a godless world.